Реклама
Книги по философии
Альберт Эйнштейн
The world as I see it
(страница 9)
People seek to minimize the danger by limitation of armaments and restrictive rules for the conduct of war. But war is not like a parlour-game in which the players loyally stick to the rules. Where life and death are at stake, rules and obligations go by the board. Only the absolute repudiation of all war is of any use here. The creation of an international court of arbitration is not enough. There must be treaties guaranteeing that the decisions of this court shall be made effective by all the nations acting in concert. Without such a guarantee the nations will never have the courage to disarm seriously.
Suppose, for example, that the American, English, German, and French Governments insisted on the Japanese Government's putting an immediate stop to their warlike operations in China, under pain of a complete economic boycott. Do you suppose that any Japanese Government would be found ready to take the responsibility of plunging its country into such a perilous adventure? Then why is it not done? Why must every individual and every nation tremble for their existence? Because each seeks his own wretched momentary advantage and refuses to subordinate it to the welfare and prosperity of the community.
That is why I began by telling you that the fate of the human race was more than ever dependent on its moral strength to-day. The way to a joyful and happy state is through renunciation and self-limitation everywhere.
Where can the strength for such a process come from? Only from those who have had the chance in their early years to fortify their minds and broaden their outlook through study. Thus we of the older generation look to you and hope that you will strive with all your might to achieve what was denied to us.
To Sigmund Freud
Dear Professor Freud,
It is admirable the way the longing to perceive the truth has
overcome every other desire in you. You have shown with
irresistible clearness how inseparably the combative and
destructive instincts are bound up with the amative and vital ones
in the human psyche. At the same time a deep yearning for that
great consummation, the internal and external liberation of
mankind from war, shines out from the ruthless logic of your
expositions. This has been the declared aim of all those who
have been honoured as moral and spiritual leaders beyond the
limits of their own time and country without exception, from
Jesus Christ to Goethe and Kant. Is it not significant that such
men have been universally accepted as leaders, in spite of the
fact that their efforts to mould the course of human affairs were
attended with but small success?
I am convinced that the great men--those whose achievements,
even though in a restricted sphere, set them above their
fellows--are animated to an overwhelming extent by the same
ideals. But they have little influence on the course of political
events. It almost looks as if this domain, on which the fate of
nations depends, had inevitably to be given over to violence and
irresponsibility.
Political leaders or governments owe their position partly to
force and partly to popular election. They cannot be regarded as
representative of the best elements, morally and intellectually, in
their respective nations. The intellectual Хlite have no direct
influence on the history of nations in these days; their lack of
cohesion prevents them from taking a direct part in the solution
of contemporary problems. Don't you think that a change might
be brought about in this respect by a free association of people
whose work and achievements up to date constitute a guarantee
of their ability and purity of aim? This international association,
whose members would need to keep in touch with each other by
a constant interchange of opinions, might, by defining its attitude
in the Press--responsibility always resting with the signatories on
any given occasion--acquire a considerable and salutary moral
influence over the settlement of political questions. Such an
association would, of course, be a prey to all the ills which so
often lead to degeneration in learned societies, dangers which
are inseparably bound up with the imperfection of human nature.
But should not an effort in this direction be risked in spite of this?
I look upon the attempt as nothing less than an imperative duty.
If an intellectual association of standing, such as I have
described, could be formed, it would no doubt have to try to
mobilize the religious organizations for the fight against war. It
would give countenance to many whose good intentions are
paralysed to-day by a melancholy resignation. Finally, I believe
that an association formed of persons such as I have described,
each highly esteemed in his own line, would be just the thing to
give valuable moral support to those elements in the League of
Nations which are really working for the great object for which
that institution exists.
I had rather put these proposals to you than to anyone else in the
world, because you are least of all men the dupe of your desires
and because your critical judgment is supported by a most
earnest sense of responsibility.
Compulsory Service
>From a letter
Instead of permission being given to Germany to introduce compulsory service it ought to be taken away from everybody else: in future none but mercenary armies should be permitted, the size and equipment of which should be discussed at Geneva. This would be better for France than to have to permit compulsory service in Germany. The fatal psychological effect of the military education of the people and the violation of the individual's rights which it involves would thus be avoided.
Moreover, it would be much easier for two countries which had agreed to compulsory arbitration for the settlement of all disputes arising out of their mutual relations to combine their military establishments of mercenaries into a single organization with a mixed staff. This would mean a financial relief and increased security for both of them. Such a process of amalgamation might extend to larger and larger combinations, and finally lead to an "international police," which would be bound gradually to degenerate as international security increased.
Will you discuss this proposal with our friends by way of setting the ball rolling? Of course I do not in the least insist on this particular proposal. But I do think it essential that we should come forward with a positive programme; a merely negative policy is unlikely to produce any practical results.
Germany and France
Mutual trust and co-operation between France and Germany can come about only if the French demand for security against military attack is satisfied. But should France frame demands in accordance with this, such a step would certainly be taken very ill in Germany.
A procedure something like the following seems, however, to be possible. Let the German Government of its own free will propose to the French that they should jointly make representations to the League of Nations that it should suggest to all member States to bind themselves to the following:--
(1) To submit to every decision of the international court of arbitration.
(2) To proceed with all its economic and military force, in concert with the other members of the League, against any State which breaks the peace or resists an international decision made in the interests of world peace.
Arbitration
Systematic disarmament within a short period. This is possible only in combination with the guarantee of all for the security of each separate nation, based on a permanent court of arbitration independent of governments.
Unconditional obligation of all countries not merely to accept the decisions of the court of arbitration but also to give effect to them.
Separate courts of arbitration for Europe with Africa, America, and Asia (Australia to be apportioned to one of these). A joint court of arbitration for questions involving issues that cannot be settled within the limits of any one of these three regions.
The International of Science
At a sitting of the Academy during the War, at the time when national and political infatuation had reached its height, Emil Fischer spoke the following emphatic words: "It's no use, Gentlemen, science is and remains international." The really great scientists have always known this and felt it passionately, even though in times of political confusion they may have remained isolated among their colleagues of inferior calibre. In every camp during the War this mass of voters betrayed their sacred trust. The international society of the academies was broken up. Congresses were and still are held from which colleagues from ex-enemy countries are excluded. Political considerations, advanced with much solemnity, prevent the triumph of purely objective ways of thinking without which our great aims must necessarily be frustrated.
What can right-minded people, people who are proof against the emotional temptations of the moment, do to repair the damage? With the majority of intellectual workers still so excited, truly international congresses on the grand scale cannot yet be held. The psychological obstacles to the restoration of the international associations of scientific workers are still too formidable to be overcome by the minority whose ideas and feelings are of a more comprehensive kind. These last can aid in the great work of restoring the international societies to health by keeping in close touch with like-minded people all over the world and resolutely championing the international cause in their own spheres. Success on a large scale will take time, but it will undoubtedly come. I cannot let this opportunity pass without paying a tribute to the way in which the desire to preserve the confraternity of the intellect has remained alive through all these difficult years in the breasts of a large number of our English colleagues especially.
